|
When a company announces stock buybacks at earnings, is that something that has already happened and they’re just informing people of it? Or currently ongoing at the time? Or would happen at a date in the future?
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 15:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 02:04 |
|
|
Cacafuego posted:When a company announces stock buybacks at earnings, is that something that has already happened and they’re just informing people of it? Or currently ongoing at the time? Or would happen at a date in the future? You need to read the release and/or filings. But generally announcing a new buyback facility means it will happen in the future.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 15:04
|
|
|
for the small caps. a company could have previously announced it had a share buyback plan. and earnings is a good time to get an update from them on if or how much of that program they’ve used. some the little poo poo co’s i like will sit on multi million dollar buy back plans for years with out using any of it which can be frustrating for me. person who like to speculate on tiny poo poo co’s
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 04:23
|
|
|
also fun small cap stuff. have an open buy back plan. not use any of it when the price is low. Then announce a new at the money share offering! at massively discounted share prices!
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 04:25
|
|
|
For a wild time check out CTNT 3-45-3 within 24 hours
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2024 17:12
|
|
|
It's been a while since I dabbled in the market and can't remember how this specific case works. If I have 20k in various positions, and no other cash in the account (but have margin that isn't being used at all) and do this: Sell X for $5k, and then immediately buy $5k of something else, I'm running on margin (5k worth) for a day until that first sell clears, correct?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 17:48
|
|
|
cr0y posted:It's been a while since I dabbled in the market and can't remember how this specific case works. Your broker might show a margin load but you wouldn't pay interest on it with any broker I have ever used. That said the regulations probably allow for them charging interest here, if they do you should switch brokers. Let me explain using the opposite since that might cause some interest to be charged. If I buy for $5,000 then sell $5,000 of something else to make my account balance positive 2 hours later. Merrill would charge me $0 they only care about closing balance. Tasty would charge me 12%/year on $5000 for 2 hours so I dunno like $0.10? This also changes if any of these are short positions. I assume these are all longs based on the nature of the question.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 17:59
|
|
|
cr0y posted:It's been a while since I dabbled in the market and can't remember how this specific case works. Yah, believe so. I get dinged a few bucks for margin interest every now and then, and I think it's this. Fwiw, just got a mail saying etrade is complying with new regulations to cut that settlement date down to one business day. https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/new-t1-settlement-cycle-what-investors-need-know-investor
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 18:00
|
|
|
I guess I will see tomorrow if they charge me a couple nickels for interest or whatever, more of just a curiosity than anything. These sort of situations is really the only time I ever use my margin account. I am on eTrade so that's neat
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 18:11
|
|
|
cr0y posted:It's been a while since I dabbled in the market and can't remember how this specific case works. A good broker should just go by the settlement date and charge you daily interest if you end a day negative. Since these trades theoretically settle on the same day for opposing amounts it shouldn't cause a margin impact. If you're trading things with different settlement days then you might end up using margin for a bit. Or I guess if the sell doesn't settle on time they could ding you for it. If you don't have a margin account then I guess you could get hit with violations of the free rising rule but honestly a competent broker shouldn't be letting you buy with unsettled cash on a cash only account anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 18:14
|
|
|
Also just as a reminder that this happening:
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
ya ya T0 already
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 18:25
|
|
|
For example the only time I got dinged on margin interest was I had a trade for like $20k settling on Friday. Then on Thursday I also clicked the button to change my core settlement position to a MMF giving 5% interest. Under the hood however this locked up all my available cash until Monday while it converted everything to the MMF. So on Friday $22k of cash goes out to buy the MMF (settling on Monday). Then the $20k trade also settles putting me into -$22k margin. I pay interest for 3 days (Friday , Saturday, Sunday) until Monday when the MMF switchover settles and then pays off the margin debt leaving me with +$2k. I was a little miffed because it wasn't really all that clear when clicking the button to change the core position would put your cash in a liminal state for day and impact other settlements. It only ended up costing me like $20 though.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 18:26
|
|
|
pixaal posted:ya ya T0 already I cannot imagine a coherent reason its not this beyond broker greed for margin accounts or some high handed government trying to limit people churning their own accounts into dust.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 21:26
|
|
|
That NVDA after hours tho
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 22:18
|
|
|
our lord and savior nvda saving the market for another quarter
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2024 22:55
|
|
|
I know this isn't the same kind of settlement, but has anyone seen improved payment/fund transfer times as a result of the FedNow rollout? Context from last year: https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/other20230720a.htm
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2024 01:25
|
|
|
mrmcd posted:For example the only time I got dinged on margin interest was I had a trade for like $20k settling on Friday. Then on Thursday I also clicked the button to change my core settlement position to a MMF giving 5% interest. Under the hood however this locked up all my available cash until Monday while it converted everything to the MMF.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2024 04:32
|
|
|
Update: did not get hit with any interest 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2024 15:53
|
|
|
cr0y posted:Update: did not get hit with any interest You sure? Based on my experience with Merrill you aren't out of the woods yet, they don't calculate interest on Margin until after the trade fully settles. Tasty does this end of day like a sane broker, some brokers do things in really dumb ways. So if you say sell an AMD 90P so you get paid to have a limit order open, you actually need $9000 cash and wont get charged the $1/day for 3 days. And then when you satisfy the funding you still have some interest not yet calculated that will still be added. If you aren't just long shares and using it to get perks for your Bank of America checking account I don't recommend Merrill for day trading. Their restrictions are pretty good if you are trying to learn and will keep you from touching stuff you probably shouldn't as a beginner.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2024 16:01
|
|
|
Not entirely sure if Andrew Coyne is genuinely calling for the Canada Pension Plan to boringly invest in some ETFs or this editorial is more just slagging the CPP for active managing really badly. quote:The Canada Pension Plan Fund had a bad year last year. You’d never know it to read the latest annual report from the fund’s managers, the CPP Investment Board, which spends much of its nearly 80,000 words boasting how, thanks to the herculean efforts of its employees and the sophisticated investment stratagems of its managers, it eked out an 8-per-cent return on investment for the CPP’s beneficiaries. Posting it here because reading this made me wonder about whether it's even possible for a sovereign fund like the CPP (net assets $575 billion) can actually seriously engage in passive investing at all. I feel like I read something about how at the very large scale it becomes impossible (but for what reason I cannot recall. Lack of volume?). I also vaguely recall reading that it becomes harder and harder to generate yield as funds get bigger (a reason some outperforming funds running a certain strategy are small and closed to new investment, as the strategy doesn't scale) so it could make sense that massive sovereign funds' returns taper off.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2024 18:45
|
|
|
I would have thought it was the other way around and the massive funds have a hard time with active strategies because of the size of their positions relative to what they’re investing in.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2024 00:44
|
|
|
*Paying out some local high schoolers to play a brass band rendition of Our House by The Madness with my Nvidia, AMAT, QCOM, SMCI winnings*
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2024 07:56
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:I also vaguely recall reading that it becomes harder and harder to generate yield as funds get bigger (a reason some outperforming funds running a certain strategy are small and closed to new investment, as the strategy doesn't scale) so it could make sense that massive sovereign funds' returns taper off. gay picnic defence posted:I would have thought it was the other way around and the massive funds have a hard time with active strategies because of the size of their positions relative to what they’re investing in. I think it's both. You can't just buy index funds if you have to invest as much money as the entire index fund has under management, or even just a large fraction of it. You can try to mirror what the index fund is doing, but that still involves buying huge portions of the average daily volume of a bunch of stocks and bonds, which can skew the price. It's also difficult to pursue active management because the only assets significantly large enough to matter for you are also big enough to be on everyone else's radar, which implies efficient pricing e.g. no particular discount for you. It's also important to understand this is a pension, which has added complexity and costs. Pension funds have numerous obligations attached to them, including "carried interest" which is a factor I don't fully understand myself. So, large pension funds tend to get just-OK returns but with very high costs. Case in point: the California State Teacher's Retirement Fund, CalSTRS, is huge: the country's second-largest pension fund, with $332.5 billion assets under management, and spending something on the order of $2B in management costs plus another $1.2B in carried interest costs (in 2022). https://www.calstrs.com/files/d9382e767/AnnualInvestmentCostReportandAttachments2022.pdf CalSTRS is widely considered a very well-run pension fund. From that report, on carried interest: quote:Carried Interest The fund in 2022 was shifting a few percent of its assets from public to private equity, a trend that sounds like it's been common among pension funds lately, probably in pursuit of higher returns. And that's a case in point: index funds don't invest in private equity, so if you think that your hundreds of billions of dollars shouldn't all be in just stock and bond index funds, and you start looking at asset classes like real estate and private equity, you're basically saying you're going to engage in active investment strategies somehow. All that said, its own reports indicate that CalSTRS is outperforming its benchmarks. As of calendar year 2022, the latest for which complete info is available for some reason, and bearing in mind that 2022 was a down year for markets: https://www.pionline.com/interactive/most-calstrs-asset-classes-outperform-benchmarks  An 8% return, net of fees, on actively managed assets, for a fund this huge, seems pretty good to me, and is meeting the goals they set forth. If CPP is getting net negative returns over the long run that's a massive failure, and one that can't be accounted for simply by saying welp, active management and huge portfolios tend to underperform.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2024 19:13
|
|
|
After trying out Mounjaro I will be dumping all of my available money into LLY.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 08:59
|
|
|
Briefly looking into this, mounjaro is sort of a gen ... Not 2, but 1.25 or 1.5 weight loss injection?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 11:55
|
|
|
It's an alternative GLP 1 Agonist to Ozempic. Overall better results in weight loss, although weight loss is off label use for it. They created Zepbound as the weight loss drug, they're exactly the same thing though. It's just a miracle drug. Reduced every type of craving I had, reduced overall just feeling bad, I have more energy, lost a bunch of weight, smoke less, drink less, feel more focused. It's the poo poo from limitless for fat people. And doesn't kill you of diarrhea and vomiting like ozempic (well in some cases it does). I have lost close to 7KG in a month and started exercising every day. I would pay any amount of money for this, and you basically have to take it until this is all ingrained in you, or otherwise forever. poo poo's nuts, can't wait to find out it will 100% give you ball cancer. Worth it though.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 13:19
|
|
|
orange sky posted:It's an alternative GLP 1 Agonist to Ozempic. Overall better results in weight loss, although weight loss is off label use for it. They created Zepbound as the weight loss drug, they're exactly the same thing though. I mean yeah but LLY is sitting at 120 PE ratio right now. TSLA is 45 and NVDA is 65. I know fundamentals don't matter and it's all memes and vibes but kinda seems like the LLY train already left the station.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 14:36
|
|
|
There's still time to get on the sofi bandwagon, guys
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 16:33
|
|
|
orange sky posted:After trying out Mounjaro I will be dumping all of my available money into LLY. I am on this as well. It is incredible.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 18:01
|
|
|
A little tip: whenever you think about investing and look at profit timelines based on a drug, it's good to look up when its patent expires. Drug patents are 20 years, but that's from the date of filing and they're often filed long, long before the drug hits the market. In this case, Mounjaro's patent will be good until 2039 so a solid 15 years which is not bad at all. You can find cases where a drug has 10 years or less before generics will hit it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
Considering that we already have multiple GLP-1 drugs on the market, what’s to say Mounjaro won’t get leapfrogged by something from Pfizer or Merck next year?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
With the weight loss drugs, it looks like the less favorable injection is the first step, then later they patent the pill form which pushes the timeline out a good number of years Ozampic/begovy etc expires late 2020s but the newly released pill doesn't expire until mid 2030s which seems like the market winner for me. People don't like needles all that much but will happily swallow multivitamins with their coffee every morning Edit: monjourno works with two receptors, vs just 1 for the OG drugs, according to the Internet How do investors look and see what FDA trials drug companies are doing/planning, + which stage they're at. Should be pretty easy to see what "leapfrog" drugs might be coming to market, even if not all of them get FDA approved r.i.p ndra Hadlock fucked around with this message at 18:35 on May 31, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 18:33
|
|
|
That is a risk, although there is also always a production pipeline issue, and also it's generally fine to have overlapping medications because some patients won't tolerate one or the other. Like, for perhaps the most famous example, the existence of cialis did not really meaningfully undermine the incredible profitability of viagra. Pharma investing is fraught. My stepdad got into this a decade ago and I was very concerned, we've had several debates about it and to hold my own I had to do a fair bit of research. I think it's key to understand the risks with any investment, and so I point out the various categories of risk each of which needs to be considered. This list is not comprehensive, it's off the top of my head: 1. Market risk. All market securities are subject to this, so it's a given. 2. Industry; the pharma industry is volatile but will probably still be up up up for the forseeable future, so we can mostly discount this. 3. Corporate management. Especially very small pharmas, which is where people look for the huge 2000% pops, you're exposed to an elevated risk of mismanagement. Even what ought to be a very promising drug can wind up sold at a discount to a company you don't own because the pharma that invented it was run into the ground by idiots. 4. Competition. This is the moat issue you raised: all drugs have side effects, cost something to produce, etc. and a competitor can come out with something that is more effective, more tolerable, has lower side effects, or cost less to produce. Or maybe they just have a bigger marketing budget. Considering competition is important for any investment, but the competitive landscape for medical therapies is complex. 5. Regulatory risk. This is the one my stepdad kept not thinking about. Medical treatments are highly regulated, there are major hurdles, and those hurdles are not just gone even after a successful phase 3 trial. Speculative investments on pre-phase-3 drugs have to take into account the possibility of just totally failing to get FDA approval, but even a medication that is on the market can turn out to have problems that result in regulatory action including suspension or withdrawal of the drug; plus the global market involves many other regulatory agencies. And politicians can get involved too, as we're seeing right now for example with therapies that regulate estrogen under attack from anti-trans legislators. But also for example, when congress steps in to regulate the price of insulin. 6. Reputational risk. I made this up, maybe there's a better term for it. But people can just go nuts about poo poo. Anti-vaxxers are the most visible one but you get these conspiracy theories and online rumormills going and it can affect the market for any drug. "This drug causes cancer/autism/contains 5g chips/makes you gay" doesn't have to be true for it to become a widespread myth that hurts sales. 7. Scientific malfeasance. This is related to 3, but rather than management being idiots or corrupt or whatever, you can sometimes get bad science. Look at what happened recently with alzheimer drugs, two or three decades of work producing medication that should have worked but was based on fundamental research that was falsified. Basically it targeted proteins that were always found elevated in the brains of alzheimers victims, except oh, actually they weren't, so the even if the drugs actually reduce that protein (probably they do), it doesn't actually prevent or slow down alzheimers at all. Big stories like this are uncommon, but you can get this at a much smaller scale too: just stuff that was supposedly "promising" turns out not to be, in part, because some scientists really really really needed positive results to keep their careers afloat. The tl;dr is that it's probably fine to e.g. invest in eli lilly or J&J or merck, but those companies are unlikely to experience a huge pop because their profits come from hundreds of products and even if one goes ham it only increases their profitability by some small amount. But if you want to invest in smaller companies developing cutting-edge therapies hoping that they'll be wildly profitable or get bought by one of the big boys, be extremely careful. There's hundreds of these guys, they've all got the latest treatment for cancer or whatever just nearly almost there, for realsies, but a huge swathe of them are going to go out of business bankrupt without ever paying out and that's possible even if their phase II trial results were super successful. Hadlock posted:How do investors look and see what FDA trials drug companies are doing/planning, + which stage they're at. Should be pretty easy to see what "leapfrog" drugs might be coming to market, even if not all of them get FDA approved r.i.p ndra that report is from https://www.biomedtracker.com/, one of those specialty analysts. My stepdad pieces together info himself on some message board or two, rather than paying for analysis, but even that isn't super hard. e2. here's the FDA's DB of applications https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/approved-blood-products/new-drug-applications-ndas Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 18:54 on May 31, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 18:43
|
|
|
Generics are functionally on the market already. Semaglutide and Tirzepatide are on the feds drug shortage list so they are available from compounding pharmacies for much cheaper. I’m on semaglutide for $300/mo. Tirzepatide is $450/mo but semaglutide is magical with no side effects for me so I’m not switching. Compared to $1k+ for the not-covered-by-insurance weight loss use case I don’t see how they get much of that huge market. Edit: I did read something about the drugs actually working by passing the blood brain barrier and hitting receptors there that also affect impulse control. So I guess there is another possible spike if studies show it works on addiction and can get that as a covered use. Arzakon fucked around with this message at 05:17 on Jun 1, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2024 05:12
|
|
|
Arzakon posted:Generics are functionally on the market already. Semaglutide and Tirzepatide are on the feds drug shortage list so they are available from compounding pharmacies for much cheaper. I’m on semaglutide for $300/mo. Tirzepatide is $450/mo but semaglutide is magical with no side effects for me so I’m not switching. Compared to $1k+ for the not-covered-by-insurance weight loss use case I don’t see how they get much of that huge market. I know a lot of people are using the compounding pharmacy approach because of the shortage, but given they're injectible products, I'm not inclined to touch them. I've seen the horseshit excuses for microbial control a lot of them use, and that was before they started being bought out by online ozempic mills, basically. Hell, they aren't even FDA regulated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2024 06:09
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:There's still time to get on the sofi bandwagon, guys I don't... not agree with trying to swing this one. Heck, my Friday ticket on this ride is already in the green!
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2024 12:35
|
|
|
Sundae posted:I know a lot of people are using the compounding pharmacy approach because of the shortage, but given they're injectible products, I'm not inclined to touch them. I've seen the horseshit excuses for microbial control a lot of them use, and that was before they started being bought out by online ozempic mills, basically. For someone with a bad vasovagal syncope I'm still slamming that needle into my thigh every week it is so good. Pills are now available and are $50-100 cheaper a month so other than me being too lazy to switch and not wanting to mess up what is working I think a lot of people will be going that route.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2024 15:04
|
|
|
Ozempic Cuts Risk of Chronic Kidney Disease Complications, Study Findsquote:Semaglutide, the compound in the blockbuster drugs Ozempic and Wegovy, dramatically reduced the risk of kidney complications, heart issues and death in people with Type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease in a major clinical trial, the results of which were published on Friday. Anyone shorting dialysis services?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2024 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 02:04 |
|
|
The government here actually banned compounded ozempic etc despite there being a critical shortage (which would normally allow compounding pharmacies to bypass the normal regs). I assume that was due to pressure from the drug companies. Anyway, there's probably a whole bunch of drugs, medical devices and services that are obsolete in a world where obesity is much less common. I think ResMed has already taken a bit of a hit to it's share price in anticipation of sleep apnea becoming rarer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2024 23:04
|
|